Dear Sir,
We are thankful to you for your response. If you can mail your postal address to mbasudeba@gmail.com, a copy of the book will reach you. In our previous post, the expressions "(x,y), (-x,y), (-x, -y) and (x, -y)" should be read as "(x=y), (-x=y), (-x,= -y) and (x,= -y)". Time is not a dimension in the sense that space has three dimensions, because, as we have pointed out in our essay, space has negative direction, but time has not. Hence there cannot be 11 dimensions.
We agree that "humans (and therefore, intelligence, mind, thought, imagination, etc.) are the consequences of the evolution of the universe". Still we stand by what we wrote. Though observer has a central role in Quantum theories, its true nature and mechanism has eluded the scientists. We define these and from this derive the other evolutionary sequences, as measurement is the perceived result of comparison between similars at any designated instant. Thus, without first defining perception and its mechanism, we cannot discuss evolution in any meaningful manner. In our TOE, we start with the pre-big-bang state (avoiding or rather explaining singularity) and using only inertia (we consider elasticity as a form of inertia) and simple laws of motion, explain first the evolution of forces and then the structures. The same physical laws give different results for macro and micro systems as a consequence of the format of evolution. We do not use renormalization, which hold as mathematically void. We do not use any complex number, as they are unphysical. In short we have a completely alternative physical theory. Though we have written about it from time to time, the complete theory will be published soon. The following are some of the testable predictions of our book.
1. The accepted value of the electric charge of quarks contains an error element of 3%. In stead of +ā
and -ā
, it should be +7/11 and -4/11. Thus, taking the measured charge of electrons as the unit, the value of the electric charge of protons is +10/11 and that of neutrons -1/11. The residual negative charge is not apparent as negative charge always confines positive charge and flows towards the concentration of positive charge - nucleus. Hence it is not felt outside. It is not revealed in measurement due to the nature of calibration of the measuring instruments. This excess negative charge confines the positive charge (nearly 2000 times in magnitude) which is revealed in atomic explosions. Charge neutral only means the number of protons and electrons are equal.
2. The value of the gravitational constant G is not the same for all systems. Just like the value for acceleration due to gravity g varies from position to position, the value of G also varies between systems. Gravity is not a single force, but a composite force of seven that act together separately on micro and the macro systems. Only this can explain the Pioneer Anomaly, which even MOND has failed to explain. Similarly, it can explain the sudden change of direction of the Voyager space crafts after the orbit of Saturn and the Fly-by anomalies.
3. The value of the fine-structure constant Ī± that determines the electromagnetic field strength as calculated by us theoretically from our atomic orbital theory is 7/960 (1/137) when correlated to the strong interaction (so-called zero energy level) and 7/900 (1/128) when correlated to the weak interaction (80 GeV level). There are 5 more values that determine the structure of the orbitals in the atomic spectra. Hence the physically available values of the s orbitals (principal quantum number) are restricted to n = 7, though theoretically, it can have any positive integer value.
4. There is nothing like Lorentz variant inertial mass. It has never been proved.
5. We do not subscribe to the modern view of fields. We believe in only two types of fields hinted in our essay.
All words used by us are precise and have universal meaning. By structure formation and displacement we mean formation of all structures from quarks to the universe as a whole. By displacement we mean all displacements from the decay of protons and neutrons to the apparently receding galaxies. We hold that field is the only absolute state. Matter is nothing but confined field. The confinement changes density, the effect of which on the external field is expressed as mass. This generates the charge, which in turn generates different effects of the external field. When another mass is subjected to such field, it experiences the effects, which are called the various fundamental forces of Nature.
What we call as attractive force is a wrong description of facts, because it implies "pull", which is physically impossible. We can only push and wrongly describe negative push as pull. Thus, gravity is not an attractive force, but only a stabilizing force that stabilizes bodies in their respective orbits, be it atomic orbits or planetary orbits or galactic orbits. The distance between the two stable bodies is determined not only by their respective masses, but also by the intensity of the field containing both, which appears as the gravitational constant. But this constant is not universal, as was discovered by Dirac way back in 1937. For stabilizing, the force must be a composite one. Thus, gravitational force is a composite force. It stabilizes not only the orbit, but also shapes the stable structures by stabilizing its various sub-systems. Thus, we said that gravity is responsible for structure formation.
Since gravity is a composite force that is experienced through the external field and since the external field is subject to fluctuation due to the interaction with different bodies, the equilibrium is continuously disturbed. This disturbance leads to currents in the field, which flows in different directions. Any particle entering that field will experience that current and will drift in that direction. In the Solar system, these currents are called Inter-Planetary Super Highways and are often used by space scientists for propelling space crafts. This shows that gravity also displaces.
There is no contradiction between our views regarding space and time. What we wrote was about digital space. What you are talking about is analog space. Space is nothing but the analog field that contains all objects that are locally confined fields. The same goes for time also. Since analog space and time cannot be measured, we wrote about digitized space and time.
What we meant by "temporally nothing" is that beyond singularity, there is no one to describe the state. Without perception, everything is non-existent. Since digitized time ceases, we used the words "temporally nothing". It only implies that the state is undescribable. But it is different from absolute nothingness. To understand the issue you must look at one off-shoot of quantum gravity, which predicts "big bounce". It has been interpreted to imply colliding galaxies. But we interpret it differently. According to our theory, the universe after reaching singularity bounces back by a mechanism described in our book. In the interregnum, there is no way to describe that state. This state is thus called "temporally nothing".
We thank you again for your well wishes for us in the contest. We are not keen on the result. All we want is that the scientific community should take their work seriously and abandon the cults of reductionism, superstition and incomprehensibity. The Scientists who evolved the present theories were eminent persons, but they were not blessed with the modern technological innovations. Thus, what they achieved by their limited data is commendable. But when we find that in extreme cases these theories do not work, we have to come out of the old confinement and build a new structure. No amount of pack work will help as the differences are too glaring. Thus, the cosmological constant has made a come back along with many previously discarded theories. We were surprised to find that most students know about MOND, but even many teachers do not know about Pioneer Anomaly that led to it. Similarly, as we have pointed out in our essay, there is no unanimity among scientists as to what constitutes reality. Since their views are different, no one view can be taken as the correct view till we reconcile the differences. Thus, we should move towards a grand unified theory only after we reconcile our inherent contradictions. As long as this goal is achieved, we will be satisfied. That will be our greatest prize as it will save a huge amount of public money that is wasted in the name of scientific research.
With kind Regards,
basudeba
